Well this is good info. I suppose however, circling back to my original post, it's futile to try doing this till nearly everyone is using an automatic encryption by default. I can't very well send an encrypted message to anyone without a public key. and they can't send one back if they don't use a client that runs enigmail or equivalent. So I wonder out loud again, why not? Why isn't this built into apple mail.app or thunderbird or any other mail client by default. It's only been 40 years!
The enigmail configuration has a keyserver setup UI with defaults loaded, which makes the upload of keys quite easy. If we are not at the point where my mother could do it, then we are close.
But this requires I know the keyserver used by every person I might e-mail. How do I know that ahead of time?
I use the enigmail extension for thunderbird. It transparently handles the encryption and decryption of messages. It looks up PGP keys on key servers for recipients of the messages I send. I store my key on pool.sks-keyservers.net
The choice of key server is entirely up to me. It is not built into enigmail.
Cool. But this isn't really fixing the core problem of universality. If everyone uses a different key server, then I have to know what key server someone used to send them an e-mail (and vica versa). We don't have that problem with DNS. every URL gets resolved. the DNS servers push out best guess routing tables. The whole internet is transparent to the user just given the DNS and a URL. It should be that way for e-mail.
Ideally you could imagine that the DNS resolver would also resolve translation of the e-mail address to a public key. It could cache the keys itself, or know what key server to query. The problem with that idea perhaps is that there are more e-mail addresses than URLs. So what you want to do instead us have the url in the e-mail address proivide the service.
THat is, if I want to send an e-mail to foo@hotmail.com then my client query's hotmail for the public key for foo. If hotmail decided not to particiapte the DNS could provide an alternative address for a catch-all server of keys.
But I just don't see how this works if everyone is using a different service provided for their key. How can my client know what to do??
Google wouldn't store her email in plaintext if she didn't hand it to them that way. Stop using a web browser for a mail interface.
One could easily use a web browser interface provided that the decode is done in the javascript on the client's computer, not back at google HQ. You could do this in the same way that most browsers will store your passwords and autofill forms. Just have a protocol that allows a decode based on locally stored key (or at least locally unlocked access to a remote key) done in such a way that the ava script never gets the key, just the decoded result.
Yes there are manual plances to cache keys. But the point is, this is manual. one needs the e-mail client to do this invisibly or it can't become the default.
All that's missing is ubiquitious public key servers
We have that now. The reason I haven't set it up for my mother is that she uses gmail and her email is stored by google in plain text anyway.
No we don't. Or if I'm wrong then please point me to the information I need to configure this transparently on an e-mail imap client. To be useful it needs to be invisible so no matter who I'm sending an e-mail too it doesn't matter if they have a public key or not. Likewise if someone is sending me an e-mail my client needs to be able to handle it regardless of being encrypted or not without my intervention.
SO what clients do that? and what public escrow do they use?
When public key encryption first came out in the late 70s, the promise was we would all have escrowed public keys. A public key would be linked to an e-mail address in the same way a DNS server connects a URL to an IP. I woul dnot need to know your public key ahead of time, my e-mail client would quietly fetch it for me using your e-mail address, and then encrypt the message.
So basically by now all e-mail should be encrypted by default if the future had panned out the way everyone thought in 1976.
All that's missing is ubiquitious public key servers and a universal protocol for binding a key to an e-mail. We do this a zillion times a day for DNS, so it's not technologically difficult.
What we need is associative memory (indexed by key, not address) where you can send a binary query to the blocks of memory and only those satisfying it return a value. This could be as simple as sending a bit mask or as complex as processing a SQL query. But you want this to happen in the memory block itself.
Without that were stuck with serial memory access over a bus whenever we are searching for something. With so much memory I can't imagine a large scale use other than video streams that doesn't boil down to searching it at some point.
As the post I'm replying to noted that with more memory comes more accumulated rubbish. If you are searching it, this is a drag. But with a distributive associative memory search it's all in parallel and saving old stuff doesn't slow it down.
Even if the hardware needed to do associative memory searches in was as large as the memory it backed, at some scale it would be vastly faster than serial searches over a bus.
Google is doing much the same on iPhones. It provides late or diminished google apps like mapping compared to the enhanced and first out features on android. Likewise google's new chromecast feature only works in the chrome browser.
It's interesting that Google is pulling the same trick Apple did with regard to reducing ports and expansions. For example the new nexus 7 doesn't have HDMI out even though all its major competotrs besides Ipad do. The apple solution is appleTV which, while costing a bit more, is an overall better solution aside from portability. Google just came out with chromecast which also offloads the need for a port onto a wireless device that costs extra. same scheme. Likewise, icloud is apples way of not requiring as much memory in their devices (or power for things like Siri). And google follows the same path with chrome.
Samsung can't match that. THey can toss in ports but in the long run the cloud model and the wireless model are going to win. Apple got it right and google figured that out too. Samsung is not going be building a cloud of their own on short notice. THeir only hope will be to buy or partner with someone who has a cloud (Nokia or Amazon) if they want to go toe to toe with google.
I agree it's redonculous. Why would samsung want to do that? They make money on hardware, they can't make money on search but google can. If google makes money on search, then it doesn't lower samsungs hardware profits. So it's win win. Even apple cant quit samsungs fabs, so samsung will always have a hardware volume advantage over any other maker including moto X.
Personally, I plan to buy a google nexus not a samsung for precisely the opposite easons given. What I want is a system that if I invest in it, it wil have a path forward. Buying the most stock platform, when it's highly featured, makes a lot more sense to me than buying a flash in the pan setup. Same reason I didn't buy amazons subsidized tablet. For me, my time and effort is worth more than saving $100 on something or having the sexiest screen tweak, only to have it go obsolete or unmaintained in the next gen.
I often bough apple all though the 90s and 2000s for the same reason. It's just not worth my time to screw around with cheaper shit that has problems I didn't plan on.
Not margin compression. Bussiness cylces, dividends, and investment in facilities (they are making some macs in the US now, they are building a new campus, they are gearing up for a new product line) One biggy is that apple took out a loan to pay their dividends. 3% of their stock prices is about 15% of their margins! so it might be the whole 22% of profits.
Apple doesn't seem to be discounting much and the cost of production is going down mostly. I think maybe people are substituting some cheaper devices for more expansive ones (ipad mini for ipad) but those will also likely turn over at a higher rate (people buy newer ones sooner if they are cheap).
Apple's cyclic not a steady force. I'm looking forward to the Liquid Metal Iwatch. I worry a bit about the smaller iphones. On the one hand they boost new sales in foreign markets (pity Nokia) and probably spike sales everywhere. But they will canibalise some new sales of the older higher margin phones. Or will they? perhaps they will have higher margins. Or perhaps people who save money on the smaller one will pick up an ipad. Or perhaps sales of the full sized iphone are saturated anyhow so there's little to canibalize. All I know is that they won't lose money!
Parental Controls comes with a porn filter. it's a couple clicks to turn it on. Of course you can also turn it off if you are the super user. So exactly what is he asking for, a way to turn it on irrevocably? That sounds more like a job for a Baracuda box upstream than the computer itself.
if you accelerate constantly a 1g for 11 light years and then decelerate at 1g fo 11 light years it takes 9 years to get there in your rest frame. in earth frame time this is much longer so you cant just come back in 18 earth years, but you can come back in 18 of your own.
They couldn't have chosen a more ironic name for it if they tried to. Or could they,/. ?
G-spot was taken I guess.
It seems like calling this google Mine, is going to cause havoc when people google the term Data Mining. I'm actually wondering if this might even have been the intent to cause obfuscation. They should have called it Google `Nuff Stuff Already or G-NSA for short, to really cover their tracks.
BY itself HTF is instant arbitrage that if it's done right assures that the market value for everything is precisely priced in terms of risk, rewards and aggregate demand at every instant. When that's true I can confidently buy a stock knowing it's not overpriced due to some off liquidity issue. And I can sell a stock knowing it's not underpriced for lack of liquidity.
Arbitrage is a from of knowledge equilibration.
Or in theory that's true. But what really happens is that if you jam enough noise into the system by making the HTF trades exceed the real information content being injected from "real" trades then the only people who can see the real signals are the ones capable of subracting off the HTF trades. That is the HTF traders can mask knowledge by intentional deceit for their own benefit. It goes off the rails when they are jammming so much noise that HTFs trade against HTFs and we actually increase volatility rather than reduce it.
So you want some HTF. But it should always be at a level just below the "real" trade volatility so that all the signals are visible and it's just arbitraging those instantly.
Taxing is a reasonable idea to fix the tragedy of the commons.
The first telegram message was taken from Numbers 23:23 (King James Bible) "What hath God wrougth". It's perhaps interesting that Numbers 23:27 for tells Online trolling: being able to ineffectually curse someone at a distance.
If this were Slashdot then the last 100 telegrams would be from people racing to be the last to send a message and all of them would be the same message, namely "Last Post!"
Slashdot Mirror
Well this is good info. I suppose however, circling back to my original post, it's futile to try doing this till nearly everyone is using an automatic encryption by default. I can't very well send an encrypted message to anyone without a public key. and they can't send one back if they don't use a client that runs enigmail or equivalent. So I wonder out loud again, why not? Why isn't this built into apple mail.app or thunderbird or any other mail client by default. It's only been 40 years!
The enigmail configuration has a keyserver setup UI with defaults loaded, which makes the upload of keys quite easy. If we are not at the point where my mother could do it, then we are close.
But this requires I know the keyserver used by every person I might e-mail. How do I know that ahead of time?
I use the enigmail extension for thunderbird. It transparently handles the encryption and decryption of messages. It looks up PGP keys on key servers for recipients of the messages I send. I store my key on pool.sks-keyservers.net
The choice of key server is entirely up to me. It is not built into enigmail.
Cool. But this isn't really fixing the core problem of universality. If everyone uses a different key server, then I have to know what key server someone used to send them an e-mail (and vica versa). We don't have that problem with DNS. every URL gets resolved. the DNS servers push out best guess routing tables. The whole internet is transparent to the user just given the DNS and a URL. It should be that way for e-mail.
Ideally you could imagine that the DNS resolver would also resolve translation of the e-mail address to a public key. It could cache the keys itself, or know what key server to query. The problem with that idea perhaps is that there are more e-mail addresses than URLs. So what you want to do instead us have the url in the e-mail address proivide the service.
THat is, if I want to send an e-mail to foo@hotmail.com then my client query's hotmail for the public key for foo. If hotmail decided not to particiapte the DNS could provide an alternative address for a catch-all server of keys.
But I just don't see how this works if everyone is using a different service provided for their key. How can my client know what to do??
Google wouldn't store her email in plaintext if she didn't hand it to them that way.
Stop using a web browser for a mail interface.
One could easily use a web browser interface provided that the decode is done in the javascript on the client's computer, not back at google HQ. You could do this in the same way that most browsers will store your passwords and autofill forms. Just have a protocol that allows a decode based on locally stored key (or at least locally unlocked access to a remote key) done in such a way that the ava script never gets the key, just the decoded result.
So you haven't found key servers yet?
Why not try on line at http://pgp.mit.edu/
Yes there are manual plances to cache keys. But the point is, this is manual. one needs the e-mail client to do this invisibly or it can't become the default.
All that's missing is ubiquitious public key servers
We have that now. The reason I haven't set it up for my mother is that she uses gmail and her email is stored by google in plain text anyway.
No we don't. Or if I'm wrong then please point me to the information I need to configure this transparently on an e-mail imap client. To be useful it needs to be invisible so no matter who I'm sending an e-mail too it doesn't matter if they have a public key or not. Likewise if someone is sending me an e-mail my client needs to be able to handle it regardless of being encrypted or not without my intervention.
SO what clients do that? and what public escrow do they use?
When public key encryption first came out in the late 70s, the promise was we would all have escrowed public keys. A public key would be linked to an e-mail address in the same way a DNS server connects a URL to an IP. I woul dnot need to know your public key ahead of time, my e-mail client would quietly fetch it for me using your e-mail address, and then encrypt the message.
So basically by now all e-mail should be encrypted by default if the future had panned out the way everyone thought in 1976.
All that's missing is ubiquitious public key servers and a universal protocol for binding a key to an e-mail. We do this a zillion times a day for DNS, so it's not technologically difficult.
Why didn't it happen?
What we need is associative memory (indexed by key, not address) where you can send a binary query to the blocks of memory and only those satisfying it return a value. This could be as simple as sending a bit mask or as complex as processing a SQL query. But you want this to happen in the memory block itself.
Without that were stuck with serial memory access over a bus whenever we are searching for something. With so much memory I can't imagine a large scale use other than video streams that doesn't boil down to searching it at some point.
As the post I'm replying to noted that with more memory comes more accumulated rubbish. If you are searching it, this is a drag. But with a distributive associative memory search it's all in parallel and saving old stuff doesn't slow it down.
Even if the hardware needed to do associative memory searches in was as large as the memory it backed, at some scale it would be vastly faster than serial searches over a bus.
Google is doing much the same on iPhones. It provides late or diminished google apps like mapping compared to the enhanced and first out features on android. Likewise google's new chromecast feature only works in the chrome browser.
BSD is the core of OSX and it's even older.
It's interesting that Google is pulling the same trick Apple did with regard to reducing ports and expansions. For example the new nexus 7 doesn't have HDMI out even though all its major competotrs besides Ipad do. The apple solution is appleTV which, while costing a bit more, is an overall better solution aside from portability. Google just came out with chromecast which also offloads the need for a port onto a wireless device that costs extra. same scheme. Likewise, icloud is apples way of not requiring as much memory in their devices (or power for things like Siri). And google follows the same path with chrome.
Samsung can't match that. THey can toss in ports but in the long run the cloud model and the wireless model are going to win. Apple got it right and google figured that out too. Samsung is not going be building a cloud of their own on short notice. THeir only hope will be to buy or partner with someone who has a cloud (Nokia or Amazon) if they want to go toe to toe with google.
When I pee I use the no-touch system.
I agree it's redonculous. Why would samsung want to do that? They make money on hardware, they can't make money on search but google can. If google makes money on search, then it doesn't lower samsungs hardware profits. So it's win win. Even apple cant quit samsungs fabs, so samsung will always have a hardware volume advantage over any other maker including moto X.
Personally, I plan to buy a google nexus not a samsung for precisely the opposite easons given. What I want is a system that if I invest in it, it wil have a path forward. Buying the most stock platform, when it's highly featured, makes a lot more sense to me than buying a flash in the pan setup. Same reason I didn't buy amazons subsidized tablet. For me, my time and effort is worth more than saving $100 on something or having the sexiest screen tweak, only to have it go obsolete or unmaintained in the next gen.
I often bough apple all though the 90s and 2000s for the same reason. It's just not worth my time to screw around with cheaper shit that has problems I didn't plan on.
Not margin compression. Bussiness cylces, dividends, and investment in facilities (they are making some macs in the US now, they are building a new campus, they are gearing up for a new product line)
One biggy is that apple took out a loan to pay their dividends. 3% of their stock prices is about 15% of their margins! so it might be the whole 22% of profits.
Apple doesn't seem to be discounting much and the cost of production is going down mostly. I think maybe people are substituting some cheaper devices for more expansive ones (ipad mini for ipad) but those will also likely turn over at a higher rate (people buy newer ones sooner if they are cheap).
You are correct, you don't get it. Lame.
Apple's cyclic not a steady force. I'm looking forward to the Liquid Metal Iwatch. I worry a bit about the smaller iphones. On the one hand they boost new sales in foreign markets (pity Nokia) and probably spike sales everywhere. But they will canibalise some new sales of the older higher margin phones. Or will they? perhaps they will have higher margins. Or perhaps people who save money on the smaller one will pick up an ipad. Or perhaps sales of the full sized iphone are saturated anyhow so there's little to canibalize. All I know is that they won't lose money!
Parental Controls comes with a porn filter. it's a couple clicks to turn it on. Of course you can also turn it off if you are the super user. So exactly what is he asking for, a way to turn it on irrevocably? That sounds more like a job for a Baracuda box upstream than the computer itself.
Graham Greene rolls over in his grave.
if you accelerate constantly a 1g for 11 light years and then decelerate at 1g fo 11 light years it takes 9 years to get there in your rest frame. in earth frame time this is much longer so you cant just come back in 18 earth years, but you can come back in 18 of your own.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephson_effect
He wants his junction back
They couldn't have chosen a more ironic name for it if they tried to. Or could they, /. ?
G-spot was taken I guess.
It seems like calling this google Mine, is going to cause havoc when people google the term Data Mining. I'm actually wondering if this might even have been the intent to cause obfuscation. They should have called it Google `Nuff Stuff Already or G-NSA for short, to really cover their tracks.
BY itself HTF is instant arbitrage that if it's done right assures that the market value for everything is precisely priced in terms of risk, rewards and aggregate demand at every instant. When that's true I can confidently buy a stock knowing it's not overpriced due to some off liquidity issue. And I can sell a stock knowing it's not underpriced for lack of liquidity.
Arbitrage is a from of knowledge equilibration.
Or in theory that's true. But what really happens is that if you jam enough noise into the system by making the HTF trades exceed the real information content being injected from "real" trades then the only people who can see the real signals are the ones capable of subracting off the HTF trades. That is the HTF traders can mask knowledge by intentional deceit for their own benefit. It goes off the rails when they are jammming so much noise that HTFs trade against HTFs and we actually increase volatility rather than reduce it.
So you want some HTF. But it should always be at a level just below the "real" trade volatility so that all the signals are visible and it's just arbitraging those instantly.
Taxing is a reasonable idea to fix the tragedy of the commons.
Why not fog the warehouse with cold viruses that give you flourescent green boogers?
The first telegram message was taken from Numbers 23:23 (King James Bible) "What hath God wrougth". It's perhaps interesting that Numbers 23:27 for tells Online trolling: being able to ineffectually curse someone at a distance.
If this were Slashdot then the last 100 telegrams would be from people racing to be the last to send a message and all of them would be the same message, namely
"Last Post!"